Is Justice getting what you deserve? Is it perhaps the balance of wisdom moderation and courage? Or is Justice a chimerical idea we are fed to go along with authority?

Beau, Ben and Logan begin to tackle this timeless question. We explicitly reference Plato's Republic, Batman and John Austin's Command Theory of Law to make sense of this question. Beau will allude to H.L.A. Hart's Core and Penumbra understanding of legal terms, as well as evoke Hart's Rule of Recognition to deal with the problem of authority.

In the end, we temporarily settle on a version of justice--"the obligatory exercise of authority" (we realized afterwards this definition seems to owe a great deal to Hans Kelsen's Pure Theory of Law, which we don't address at all), and our philosophers agree to re-attack this problem another time.

No question so concerns our collective humanity as that of freedom. Unsatisfied with our first conclusions on the subject, Ben and I reframe the question of Liberty. Perhaps it is not choice maximizes freedom (to the credit of Kitty as well from the last episode, no quantity of colorful consumer choices which line the shelves of our stores and line our streets with briefly used garbage add even an ounce of real freedom to our lives) but there are certain higher order freedoms that outline what it is to lead a free life. If we but look to the Federalist Papers or the Preamble to our United States Constitution, we find a treasured attempt to outline freedoms by demarcating the limits of government power. It is from this angle, we re-attempt to discover what it is that makes us free.

Logan asks Kitty, Mike and Ben "what is Liberty? Is it the most choice? Is it the least obligation? Is it the least arbitrary system?"

There is perhaps no concept so central to humanity as freedom. Every choice is an inherently human exercise of the will.

The four Philosophers' discussion of what Liberty means ranges from Cherry Blossoms and John Denver to slavery and John Rawls' veil of ignorance. They decide that obligation and choice are interrelated, that the cost of a given action is a part of freedom, and that society today is generally far more free than society of yesteryear because of how much more choice the average American enjoys.

Additionally, Mike discovers that expectations of others are often obligations.

Can you take an oath that changes your moral obligations? Can you make a personal decision to follow a specific set of moral guidelines? Why do Veterinarians and soldiers take an oath but not (typically) data analysts? Should Philosophy Club members take an oath and what would it sound like? Sara, Ben and Logan discuss all these and more!

Would Casablanca have been as good if it started in Paris? Ben, Logan and Sara ask why you should tell a story out of order, using flashbacks, flash-forwards and a handful of stranger options. Naturally, Christopher Nolan Films feature prominently, but so too do classics from the Godfather Part II to Mozart's Don Giovanni. We consider the pitfalls that make a brilliant use of time in one film an unnecessarily confusing gimmick in another. We explore the difference between obscurity in one sense, and mystery in another. Finally, we consider the usefulness of telling a story out of order in TV shows, Books, Plays, and even Music and Painting! We hope you discover something about storytelling across media.

Sara, Ben, Mike and Logan embark on a broad discussion that goes to the heart of public policy making and comes back again.

We begin by taking a situational test designed to assess the social skills of prospective Veterinarians. And we continue by asking the hard questions that get to the marrow of the issue.

Should a veterinarian treat a patient with sub-standard care if their client (the owner) cannot afford better?

Should you help someone even if may cost you your job?

Should People have the right to own a pet? What would it cost to help pet owners with necessary care? Should people have a right to childcare? Under what conditions can a society give a right?

Are externalities a good way to assess public policy?

In this first of its kind episode, Kyra and Mackenzie revisit the "Mansplaining" episode of Philosophy club.

Mackenzie initially argues against the usefulness of the term and bemoans that the label Mansplaining tends to end conversations and close minds.

Kyra counters that the label Mansplaining contributes to an ongoing journey of cultural self-discovery. Kyra refers to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s idea: "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

Sara, Logan and Ben ask "What is mansplaining?" "Why is it so aggravating?" and "How do you avoid mansplaining?"

Along the way we discuss Essentialism and Bell Hooks, relevant knowledge, and we discover what a male Gynecologist and a Veterinarian have in common!